If you can't bring yourself to admit that the RE would have a horizon, then defend your claim that it would not, remembering that that is claiming it wouldn't have a horizon at all, not merely that it wouldn't have one visible when looking out level.
Upright, 5 feet...level vision...your Earth curving down and away from that. No horizon. How simple can that be ?
And yet again you refuse to answer an extremely simple question.
Do you accept that a RE would have a horizon, and just claim that it would not be visible with a level view, or do you claim that the RE does not have a horizon at all?
Quit with the deflection and just answer the question, because so far in this thread you like to appeal to level to pretend there isn't a horizon, to dismiss the fact that the horizon would be so close to level that unless your FOV is tiny you would see it.
So just forget about a level view for now and tell us if you think the RE should have a horizon at all.
I've answered your question but you certainly avoid answering mine.
Not really. The one time you came close was when you claimed you would have a blur, which you outright refused to go further into.
Remember, this question is simply asking if the RE has a horizon. It isn't asking if you would see it through a level view. That comes later.
You saying you wouldn't see it with a level view is NOT answering that question. It is answering a different question.
So again, do you think the RE has a horizon AT ALL?
Can you actually answer this question and be consistent dealing with whatever issue your answer results in, either explaining why it doesn't have a horizon, or dealing with the logical consequences of it.
When you start actually answering the questions asked instead of the questions you want to be asked your demands to have your questions answered would carry more weight.
I'll say it again.
The horizon is always at eye level.
Except as repeatedly observed, such as in the evidence provided earlier which you dismiss as a conjob with no justification at all, all because it shows you are wrong.
You saying it is worthless when evidence shows you are wrong.
Just how much do you think the earth would curve downward and away from your eye-level 6' elevation view?
It doesn't matter to be honest.
Yes it does, as repeatedly shown with you incapable of refuting the logic that shows you are wrong.
Perspective makes things below you appear higher.
That means close to your feet, when the drop is ~0 and the ground is travelling ~ parallel to your line of sight, perspective is going to be more significant and result in the ground appear to rise into your FOV.
Then when further away, past the horizon, the downwards gradient is far more significant and the effect of perspective is less significant, meaning the ground gets lower visually and this is what produces the horizon.
As the math has clearly shown (and you have completely ignored as you cannot refute it), the horizon, when 2 m above sea level, will be at roughly 2.7 arc minutes below level. This is insignificant, and unless you had a tiny FOV, you would see this horizon in a level view.
That is why it matters.
That is why I say you are pretending Earth is a tiny ball you can hold in your hand.
If Earth was such a tiny ball, then when standing 2 m above it, the curvature becomes the dominant effect, before it is anywhere close to visually at eye level.
The issue is still the same for your globalists.
You mean not an issue at all and instead you just continuing to dishonest misrepresent the globe to pretend there is an issue?
You cannot have any horizon and we clearly do have one
Again, is this you claiming that the RE does not have a horizon at all, regardless of what direction you look, or is it merely you claiming that it wouldn't be in a level view?